World News

32379 readers

1105 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

668

A bombing in Gaza killed an influencer's family—Instagram responded by suspending his account (www.dailydot.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

54 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In a video on Oct. 13, Instagram influencer and photojournalist Motaz Azaiza shared footage of the rubble of an apartment, the site of an Israeli bombardment that killed 15 of his family members.

He turns the camera on himself first, visibly upset, and then shows the scene—the ruin of the building, a bloodstain, a neighbor carrying a child’s body draped with a shroud.

In response, Meta restricted access to his account.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If freedom of speech can't protect you against corporate censorship then it's meaningless.

[–] hydrospanner 10 points 1 year ago

If freedom of speech can't protect you against corporate censorship then it's meaningless.

That's the biggest load of horse shit I've read today.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Any website owner has the right to decide if he wants to remove certain content on his website. That is not an infringement of free speech.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, not in today's world where they are sock puppets for the government.

It doesn't matter because no one else can just infringe on your rights either. Rights are not about just protecting you from government, they're there to protect you from other people.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

It is an infringement of free speech as a concept.

It is not an infringement of US law as the relevant protections are limited in scope to governmental actions.

Obviously US law and even more so the supreme court's interpretations of them are flawed, both on a moral level (big corps should also not be allowed to censor speech) and a logical level (censoring speech is free speech, corps are entitled to human rights).

[–] Mrkawfee 1 points 1 year ago

Except if you have a de facto monopoly on social media which is the digital equivalent of a public forum then you have the ability to effectively curtail free speech.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So you're all for the "marketplace of ideas" then eh? If corporations aren't allowed to censor and edit as they please, that means that Nazis are going to be front and center on every social media platform.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Uhh.. Why is that?

Are you saying in a vacuum those ideas are the most palatable or something? Because that’s what it sounds like

I really worry about the future when people just throw their hands up in the air and say “well, fuck it, either we become totalitarians or we let nazis take over”. That’s not much of a choice